Lakers vs. Raptors, January 19th

With their four superstars together on the floor, the Los Angeles Lakers are looking to build more chemistry while trying to turn things around on the road.

Hoping to avoid their first five-game road skid in six years, the Lakers try for a fifth consecutive victory over the hard-luck Toronto Raptors on Sunday.

Despite losing seven of nine, Los Angeles (17-22) was close to a victory Thursday before falling 99-90 at home to Miami. With Pau Gasol back after missing five games with a concussion, the Lakers went on a 14-3 run to take a three-point fourth-quarter lead before LeBron James helped the Heat pull away.

"It's a good measuring stick. We have to get better. We've got to get smoother."

Even with Gasol, Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard and Steve Nash together for only the 10th game this season, Los Angeles shot 43.1 percent, committed 20 turnovers and went scoreless in the final 2 1/2 minutes.

"We couldn't get a rhythm and I thought we could have made a lot more money out of a lot of situations over the course of the night that we will down the road," Nash said. "I think we showed our lack of common experiences."

Gasol, who didn't start, had 12 points, four rebounds, four assists and five fouls in 24 minutes. After scoring 53 over the previous two games, Dwight Howard had 13 points and 16 rebounds but went 5 of 13 from the free-throw line.

Kobe Bryant, who scored 22, found reason for optimism after Los Angeles held its third straight opponent to fewer than 100 points after giving up 111.8 in the previous six.

"It's not much of a setback," he said.

The Lakers begin a three-game trip trying to avoid losing five straight away from home for the first time since March 4-15, 2007. They may have a good chance to avoid matching that slide as they've won two in a row at Toronto and are 12-4 there overall.

Bryant scored 27 and hit a fadeaway jumper with 4.2 seconds left to give the Lakers a fourth consecutive victory in the series, 94-92 at Air Canada Centre on Feb. 12.

Howard averaged 30.0 points in his last three games there with Orlando.

Hoping to avoid their third losing streak of at least five contests, the Raptors (14-56) have dropped each of the last three by seven or fewer points -- the past two in overtime. After falling 107-105 to Chicago on Wednesday, the Raptors blew a 19-point lead en route to a 108-101 defeat at Philadelphia on Friday.

"When you want to become an elite team and that team wants to win and make the playoffs, you don't have an ease mode," said guard Kyle Lowry, who had 11 points and 11 assists against the 76ers. "You have to go hard and try to win every game and keep it going."

Toronto has struggled to sustain anything positive with Andrea Bargnani out indefinitely and Jonas Valanciunas and Linas Kleiza day to day.

Point guard Jose Calderon has totaled 50 points and 18 assists while going 21 of 32 (65.6 percent) from the field in the last two home contests versus Los Angeles.

With Lou Williams now out for the season and the ongoing drama surrounding Josh Smith, Atlanta could be a team set to fall.

Suddenly getting in to the playoffs with 38+ wins doesn't seem unlikely. Unfortunately what seems unlikely is the Raptors going 24-18 to finish the year just to reach 38 wins. Of all the games that have been thrown away by Toronto, the Philly one is probably going to hurt the most since they are the team likely to snag the 8th spot should Atlanta crumble..... or Detroit and there was a loss there too that should not have been.

It is easy to get caught up in the referees, the close losses to start the year, bad luck, injuries but the sad truth is all those factors together spell out the problem with the team: they aren't good. Excuses are for losers and the Raptors have determined their own destiny by allowing others to dictate it for them.

If Raps win tomorrow good nice to make the Lakers feel even worse and set the trade pieces in motion, also it would be good for the kids to beat the super team LA Lakers... Lets put that whole gee I wish we had Nash to rest now win or lose I never wanted him in Raptor land.

I am not sure if it would be considered an excuse. I look at it as the cause.....

The cause of three losses this year has been bad reffing in the last 20 seconds of three games. Then the Raps would only need to go 21-21 to get to 38 wins. I know, I know, "...shouldn't put yourself in a position where the refs..." blah, blah, blah.

Alternatively the refs shouldn't make such blatant and obvious mistakes, nor should they let their personal bias against the Raps allow them to ignore something as obvious as Anderson being pushed out of bounds.

The cause of three losses this year has been bad reffing in the last 20 seconds of three games. Then the Raps would only need to go 21-21 to get to 38 wins. I know, I know, "...shouldn't put yourself in a position where the refs..." blah, blah, blah.

Alternatively the refs shouldn't make such blatant and obvious mistakes, nor should they let their personal bias against the Raps allow them to ignore something as obvious as Anderson being pushed out of bounds.

Raps deserved to lose all those games. If you have a 20 point lead and it manages to come down to the last shot, no way you deserve to win.

The cause of three losses this year has been bad reffing in the last 20 seconds of three games. Then the Raps would only need to go 21-21 to get to 38 wins. I know, I know, "...shouldn't put yourself in a position where the refs..." blah, blah, blah.

Alternatively the refs shouldn't make such blatant and obvious mistakes, nor should they let their personal bias against the Raps allow them to ignore something as obvious as Anderson being pushed out of bounds.

sigh... breaking down a loss or a win due to one specific play, when there are usually 190+ total possessions in a game, is a huge over simplification.

lets say the inbound play in the Philly game was the wrong call. What about the Lowry foul they rescinded, and decided on a jump ball (when they could have allowed Philly to inbound the ball), which Amir won? At the most basic of levels Philly lost a possession on that play and therefore the potential to score, while Toronto gained one (and did score). Had the refs called that differently (and not in the Raptors favour), even if the game remained similar, the score at the end of the game is much different and the entire inbounds play likely doesn't happen.

So to say the cause of three losses was due to the refs is just bunk. 1 play, 1 call, 1 possession, doesn't make or break a game. Yes each possession seems more valuable when the score is close and the game is late, but in the grand scheme of things every possession has equal weighting because each possession leads to those late game situations.

Beyond that, refs make mistakes because they are human. And its FANS who shouldn't allow their personal bias towards the raps ignore something as obvious as the refs make mistakes, that their is no evidence of some league wide conspiracy against Toronto, calls help the Raps to, the total game influences the outcome and that in general, shit happens.

So, this you call an oversimplification, yet you have an avatar equalling Palin and Facism. Did you know, by the way, that Obama is a communist? Bush? Terrorist or Nazi. Al Gore? Manbearpig.

I'm not sure how any of that even relates, but I actually don't think Palin herself is a Fascist. I don't even believe she'd understand what fascism is or how it works. But her beliefs, and many of the tea partiests, are exactly those that give rise to and embrace fascist ideals. Small but centralized government strongly tied with corporations, overbearing nationalism, militarism, and loss of personal freedoms in the name of other freedoms.

You probably can't read the quote at the bottom but its a quote for pre WWII (it mistakenly says 1835, but I believe its 1935) that says "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross". Its more of the reason I like it than just because Palin's in the picture

Tea Partiest and the far right may not mean to be fascist or see themselves as such, but that doesn't mean their beliefs, philosophies and ideas don't support or give rise to it.

As for the rest I didn't know... always glad to hear your opinion on it though.

I'm not sure how any of that even relates, but I actually don't think Palin herself is a Fascist. I don't even believe she'd understand what fascism is or how it works. But her beliefs, and many of the tea partiests, are exactly those that give rise to and embrace fascist ideals. Small but centralized government strongly tied with corporations, overbearing nationalism, militarism, and loss of personal freedoms in the name of other freedoms.

You probably can't read the quote at the bottom but its a quote for pre WWII (it mistakenly says 1835, but I believe its 1935) that says "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross". Its more of the reason I like it than just because Palin's in the picture

Tea Partiest and the far right may not mean to be fascist or see themselves as such, but that doesn't mean their beliefs, philosophies and ideas don't support or give rise to it.

As for the rest I didn't know... always glad to hear your opinion on it though.

Adding 1835 to a quote about Facism shows how thoughtful the makers of this, probably fake, photo and poster are.

I don't think most traditional facists would be happy with small government... On the whole it's just a pretty stupid use of weaselwords to stop any debate whatsoever (what's there to debate? They're facists right?). The far left calls Palin et al Facists (and this has been going on at least since Reagan was called a facist - as many European (left-wing) intellectuals did), and the far right calls Obama et al communists. Just find some ideas that might somehow coincide with some ideas of facism (and that's pretty easy as facism contains many ideas from different origin - socialism and liberalism alike). You might as well have an avatar of Obama and Hitler, that's about as well thought out as this one, but would, somehow ..., get less approval.

But maybe you have a competition going on with our karatakid's blantatly homophobic signature, with which nobody seems to have a problem (because it's directed at lebron?).

Adding 1835 to a quote about Facism shows how thoughtful the makers of this, probably fake, photo and poster are.

I don't think most traditional facists would be happy with small government... On the whole it's just a pretty stupid use of weaselwords to stop any debate whatsoever (what's there to debate? They're facists right?). The far left calls Palin et al Facists (and this has been going on at least since Reagan was called a facist - as many European (left-wing) intellectuals did), and the far right calls Obama et al communists. Just find some ideas that might somehow coincide with some ideas of facism (and that's pretty easy as facism contains many ideas from different origin - socialism and liberalism alike). You might as well have an avatar of Obama and Hitler, that's about as well thought out as this one, but would, somehow ..., get less approval.

But maybe you have a competition going on with our karatakid's blantatly homophobic signature, with which nobody seems to have a problem (because it's directed at lebron?).

As this isn't really the thread for such a discussion I'll just mention a final few things. First just because Hitler was a fascist doesn't make fascists like Hitler or fascist ideals like Nazism. Most are much more subtle and much less extreme.

Secondly, 'traditional' facism is defined by small government but big military. Its corporations or industry tied to government that serve a large function of what governemnt otherwise would. If you only view facism as the 'nazism' we see in movies and on TV, then its easy to think 'oh the government was huge as it ran the entire nation and almost a continent', but that really wasn't and isn't the case. (alot of what is seen as government's doing was actually industry. Now industry was often acting on behalf and/or with the benifit of government. But it was more often than not at best indirect control by government, and only by a few in government)

Third I completely agree that just because some ideals or philosophies overlap or stem from comparable orgins doesn't mean they are all the same. (Communism and Fascism are typically seen as the far right and the far left of the political spectrum yet they overlap so amazingly if one didn't put a name on them they'd be seen as almost identical) It just goes to show how non-linear politics actually is. But that ofcourse doesn't mean that beliefs and philosophies need to overlap perfectly to be the same or similar or lead to the same end.

Finally, and to go full circle, this all just goes to show how 'non simplistic' the idea of my avatar is doesn't it?

As this isn't really the thread for such a discussion I'll just mention a final few things. First just because Hitler was a fascist doesn't make fascists like Hitler or fascist ideals like Nazism. Most are much more subtle and much less extreme.

Secondly, 'traditional' facism is defined by small government but big military. Its corporations or industry tied to government that serve a large function of what governemnt otherwise would. If you only view facism as the 'nazism' we see in movies and on TV, then its easy to think 'oh the government was huge as it ran the entire nation and almost a continent', but that really wasn't and isn't the case. (alot of what is seen as government's doing was actually industry. Now industry was often acting on behalf and/or with the benifit of government. But it was more often than not at best indirect control by government, and only by a few in government)

Third I completely agree that just because some ideals or philosophies overlap or stem from comparable orgins doesn't mean they are all the same. (Communism and Fascism are typically seen as the far right and the far left of the political spectrum yet they overlap so amazingly if one didn't put a name on them they'd be seen as almost identical) It just goes to show how non-linear politics actually is. But that ofcourse doesn't mean that beliefs and philosophies need to overlap perfectly to be the same or similar or lead to the same end.

Finally, and to go full circle, this all just goes to show how 'non simplistic' the idea of my avatar is doesn't it?

(Less important note, ofcourse the photo is fake)

About the bold: hey, I didn't bring your avatar to this thread.

Of course it's important that the photo is fake.

Facism is a term that ca be used to describe many things (and in a sense, as Orwell already said, this makes it meaningless). What you do here is use some of the things ascribed to fascism which have similarities with right wing ideas and boom, here we are, we can weaselword them.

"'traditional' facism is defined by small government but big military." I'm sorry, but that's just plain wrong. First of all, traditional fascism wasn't 'defined' at all (and I probably shouldn't have used the term) and except for the big ones you mention (as 'non-traditional?') some of the other ones at that time weren't at all about a big military, see Portugal for example. But that's just a minor detail.

Non of it shows how, somehow, your avatar is non-simplistic. It's more simplistic and unintelligent than anything Palin herself has ever said and that ain't good. Considering all the deaths that have been brought upon my part of the world, in my country, in my town and in my family thanks to Fascism I find such a blantantly ignorant careless choice of avator, spread to attack an ordinary right wing politician, pretty appalling. But whatever, you don't exactly strike me as someone who is able to reflect on that.

Facism is a term that ca be used to describe many things (and in a sense, as Orwell already said, this makes it meaningless). What you do here is use some of the things ascribed to fascism which have similarities with right wing ideas and boom, here we are, we can weaselword them.

"'traditional' facism is defined by small government but big military." I'm sorry, but that's just plain wrong. First of all, traditional fascism wasn't 'defined' at all (and I probably shouldn't have used the term) and except for the big ones you mention (as 'non-traditional?') some of the other ones at that time weren't at all about a big military, see Portugal for example. But that's just a minor detail.

Non of it shows how, somehow, your avatar is non-simplistic. It's more simplistic and unintelligent than anything Palin herself has ever said and that ain't good. Considering all the deaths that have been brought upon my part of the world, in my country, in my town and in my family thanks to Fascism I find such a blantantly ignorant careless choice of avator, spread to attack an ordinary right wing politician, pretty appalling. But whatever, you don't exactly strike me as someone who is able to reflect on that.

No you just happened to bring it up, decided to insult myself and my opinion of it and then proceed to use complete inaccuracy and logical fallacies to support an erroneous and irrelevant claim (And exactly how does your belief that my avatar is 'simplistic' have anything to do with my original post about refs, losses and missed calls? And where did I claim 'ordinary right wing' politicians support it? Traditional fascism is indeed defined aswell as debated, and defined by the people who help institute it,)

On top of that, Europe isn't only your part of the world, and it didn't only happen in your country or your town and it didn't only happen to your family. I lost grand parents and relatives to it, my parents lived through it, my family was forced out because of it and relatives in Canada helped and died fighting it. My numerous papers and time researching and studying fascism through university and beyond I believe helped me not only reflect on it but understand it.

But I'm glad you feel you can somehow judge me based on what you think you know about me, brought about by a single photo I use as my avatar and your own narcissistic view that you know better because you say you do.